Logic circuits are an integral part of digital systems, such as computers. Essentially, a logic circuit processes a number of inputs to produce a number of outputs for use by the digital system. The inputs and outputs are generally electronic signals that take on one of two “binary” values, a “high” logic value or a “low” logic value. The logic circuit manipulates the inputs using binary logic which describes, in a mathematical way, a given or desired relationship between the inputs and the outputs of the logic circuit.
Logic circuits that are tailored to the specific needs of a particular customer can be very expensive to fabricate on a commercial basis. Thus, general purpose very large scale integration (VLSI) circuits are defined. VLSI circuits serve as many logic roles as possible, which helps to consolidate desired logic functions. However, random logic circuits are still required to tie the various elements of a digital system together.
Several schemes are used to implement these random logic circuits. One solution is standard logic, such as transistor-transistor logic (TTL). TTL integrated circuits are versatile because they integrate only a relatively small number of commonly used logic functions. The drawback is that large numbers of TTL integrated circuits are typically required for a specific application. This increases the consumption of power and board space, and drives up the overall cost of the digital system.
One alternative to standard logic is fully custom logic integrated circuits. Custom logic circuits are precisely tailored to the needs of a specific application. This allows the implementation of specific circuit architectures that dramatically reduces the number of parts required for a system. However, custom logic devices require significantly greater engineering time and effort, which increases the cost to develop these circuits and may also delay the production of the end system.
A less expensive alternative to custom logic is the “programmable logic array.” Programmable logic arrays take advantage of the fact that complex combinational logic functions can be reduced and simplified into various standard forms. For example, logical functions can be manipulated and reduced down to traditional Sum of Products (SOP) form. In SOP form, a logical function uses just two types of logic functions that are implemented sequentially. This-is referred to as two-level logic and can be implemented with various conventional logic functions, e.g., AND-OR, NAND-NAND, NOR-NOR.
One benefit of the programmable logic array is that it provides a regular, systematic approach to the design of random, combinational logic circuits. A multitude of logical functions can be created from a common building block, e.g., an array of transistors. The logic array is customized or “programmed” by creating a specific metallization pattern to interconnect the various transistors in the array to implement the desired function.
Programmable logic arrays are fabricated using photolithographic techniques that allow semiconductor and other materials to be manipulated to form integrated circuits as is known in the art. These photolithographic techniques essentially use light that is focused through lenses and masks to define patterns in the materials with microscopic dimensions. The equipment and techniques that are used to implement this photolithography provide a limit for the size of the circuits that can be formed with the materials. Essentially, at some point, the lithography cannot create a fine enough image with sufficient clarity to decrease the size of the elements of the circuit. In other words, there is a minimum dimension that can be achieved through conventional photolithography. This minimum dimension is referred to as the “critical dimension” (CD) or minimum “feature size” (F) of the photolithographic process. The minimum feature size imposes one constraint on the size of the components of a programmable logic array. In order to keep up with the demands for larger programmable logic arrays, designers search for ways to reduce the size of the components of the array.
As the density requirements become higher and higher in logic and memories it becomes more and more crucial to minimize device area. The programmable logic array (PLA) circuit in the NOR-NOR configuration is one example of an architecture for implementing logic circuits.
Flash memory cells are one possible solution for high density memory requirements. Flash memories include a single transistor, and with high densities would have the capability of replacing hard disk drive data storage in computer systems. This would result in delicate mechanical systems being replaced by rugged, small and durable solid-state memory packages, and constitute a significant advantage in computer systems. What is required then is a flash memory with the highest possible density or smallest possible cell area.
Flash memories have become widely accepted in a variety of applications ranging from personal computers, to digital cameras and wireless phones. Both INTEL and AMD have separately each produced about one billion integrated circuit chips in this technology.
The original EEPROM or EARPROM and flash memory devices described by Toshiba in 1984 used the interploy dielectric insulator for erase. (See generally, F. Masuoka et al., “A new flash EEPROM cell using triple polysilicon technology,” IEEE Int. Electron Devices Meeting, San Francisco, pp. 464–67, 1984; F. Masuoka et al., “256K flash EEPROM using triple polysilicon technology,” IEEE Solid-State Circuits Conf., Philadelphia, pp. 168–169, 1985). Various combinations of silicon oxide and silicon nitride were tried. (See generally, S. Mori et al., “reliable CVD inter-poly dialectics for advanced E&EEPROM,” Symp. On VLSI Technology, Kobe, Japan, pp. 16–17, 1985). However, the rough top surface of the polysilicon floating gate resulted in, poor quality interpoly oxides, sharp points, localized high electric fields, premature breakdown and reliability problems.
Widespread use of flash memories did not occur until the introduction of the ETOX cell by INTEL in 1988. (See generally, U.S. Pat. No. 4,780,424, “Process for fabricating electrically alterable floating gate memory devices,” 25 Oct. 1988; B. Dipert and L. Hebert, “Flash memory goes mainstream,” IEEE Spectrum, pp. 48–51, October, 1993; R. D. Pashley and S. K. Lai, “Flash memories, the best of two worlds,” IEEE Spectrum, pp. 30–33, December 1989). This extremely simple cell and device structure resulted in high densities, high yield in production and low cost. This enabled the widespread use and application of flash memories anywhere a non-volatile memory function is required. However, in order to enable a reasonable write speed the ETOX cell uses channel hot electron injection, the erase operation which can be slower is achieved by Fowler-Nordhiem tunneling from the floating gate to the source. The large barriers to electron tunneling or hot electron injection presented by the silicon oxide-silicon interface, 3.2 eV, result in slow write and erase speeds even at very high electric fields. The combination of very high electric fields and damage by hot electron collisions in the oxide result in a number of operational problems like soft erase error, reliability problems of premature oxide breakdown and a limited number of cycles of write and erase.
Other approaches to resolve the above described problems include; the use of different floating gate materials, e.g. SiC, SiOC, GaN, and GaAIN, which exhibit a lower work function (see FIG. 1A), the use of structured surfaces which increase the localized electric fields (see FIG. 1B), and amorphous SiC gate insulators with larger electron affinity, χ, to increase the tunneling probability and reduce erase time (see FIG. 1C).
One example of the use of different floating gate (FIG. 1A) materials is provided in U.S. Pat. No. 5,801,401 by L. Forbes, entitled “FLASH MEMORY WITH MICROCRYSTALLINE SILICON CARBIDE AS THE FLOATING GATE STRUCTURE.” Another example is provided in U.S. Pat. No. 5,852,306 by L. Forbes, entitled “FLASH MEMORY WITH NANOCRYSTALLINE SILICON FILM AS THE FLOATING GATE.” Still further examples of this approach are provided in pending applications by L. Forbes and K. Ahn, entitled “DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY OPERATION OF A FLASH MEMORY DEVICE WITH CHARGE STORAGE ON A LOW ELECTRON AFFINITY GaN OR GaAIN FLOATING GATE,” Ser. No. 08/908098, and “VARIABLE ELECTRON AFFINITY DIAMOND-LIKE COMPOUNDS FOR GATES IN SILICON CMOS MEMORIES AND IMAGING DEVICES,” Ser. No. 08/903452.
An example of the use of the structured surface approach (FIG. 1B) is provided in U.S. Pat. No. 5,981,350 by J. Geusic, L. Forbes, and K. Y. Ahn, entitled “DRAM CELLS WITH A STRUCTURE SURFACE USING A SELF STRUCTURED MASK.” Another example is provided in U.S. Pat. No. 6,025,627 by L. Forbes and J. Geusic, entitled “ATOMIC LAYER EXPITAXY GATE INSULATORS AND TEXTURED SURFACES FOR LOW VOLTAGE FLASH MEMORIES.”
Finally, an example of the use of amorphous SiC gate insulators (FIG. 1C) is provided in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/903,453 by L. Forbes and K. Ahn, entitled “GATE INSULATOR FOR SILICON INTEGRATED CIRCUIT TECHNOLOGY BY THE CARBURIZATION OF SILICON.”
Additionally, graded composition insulators to increase the tunneling probability and reduce erase time have been described by the same inventors. (See, L. Forbes and J. M. Eldridge, “GRADED COMPOSITION GATE INSULATORS TO REDUCE TUNNELING BARRIERS IN FLASH MEMORY DEVICES,” application Ser. No. 09/945,514.
However, all of these approaches relate to increasing tunneling between the floating gate and the substrate such as is employed in a conventional ETOX device and do not involve tunneling between the control gate and floating gate through and inter-poly dielectric.
Therefore, there is a need in the art to provide improved programmable memory address and decode circuits. The programmable memory address and decode circuits should provide improved flash memory densities while avoiding the large barriers to electron tunneling or hot electron injection presented by the silicon oxide-silicon interface, 3.2 eV, which result in slow write and erase speeds even at very high electric fields. There is also a need to avoid the combination of very high electric fields and damage by hot electron collisions in the which oxide result in a number of operational problems like soft erase error, reliability problems of premature oxide breakdown and a limited number of cycles of write and erase. Further, when using an interpoly dielectric insulator erase approach, the above mentioned problems of having a rough top surface on the polysilicon floating gate which results in, poor quality interpoly oxides, sharp points, localized high electric fields, premature breakdown and reliability problems must be avoided.